From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-bw0-f43.google.com (mail-bw0-f43.google.com [209.85.214.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B371D200CC3 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 04:46:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bkas6 with SMTP id s6so13908067bka.16 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 04:46:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:content-type; bh=zzd9+Y2J5JN47C3x+NGuKwDd77YdMtqXDvy6p1PZwUI=; b=PSZ+ijTUH8m7sRB4K8zC8FPKxTEVdvL5+DIdEv4fRy0WB8kd0YDg8l81HZAeB/IWwz eZb2WM1hSRkpMsFZv6hIVgfh9ri7GJS+Ih2ySJjJaSgMB/pWl1RVsC78Zp7qxF/2pKR7 p5BhOpz+a5NtxLsverk/MKRXuhXE4ZqVJYSmw= Received: by 10.204.128.80 with SMTP id j16mr9413091bks.28.1318333565809; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 04:46:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.63] (lincs-gw.enst.fr. [137.194.164.55]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ex8sm20896191bkc.2.2011.10.11.04.46.04 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 11 Oct 2011 04:46:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E942C7C.6020506@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 13:46:04 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?David_T=E4ht?= Organization: Bufferbloat.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bloat , mark@santcroos.net, sytsevg@gmail.com Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------020602000405070306010504" Subject: [Bloat] Performance simulation of buffer bloat in routers X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:46:10 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------020602000405070306010504 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit while catching up on the literature and reading the following: http://staff.science.uva.nl/~delaat/netbuf/bufferbloat_MS-SG.pdf And "Performance simulation of buffer bloat in routers" http://staff.science.uva.nl/~delaat/netbuf/bufferbloat_BG-DD.pdf I note that while otherwise looking very good at first scan, it would be nice to have several additions to the second paper. I was unable to find the email addresses of the authors of the second paper, so I'm cc'ing the first in the hope that they can be contacted. A) Having a copy of the model's code used would be VERY useful to us... B) The paper stops the experiments at 500 buffers. 1) the range 1064-1256 is the effective real-world default for ethernet on most versions of Linux. It would be useful to have a model and analysis for what happens in the real world (although I suspect they would have to increase the test duration). I'd like to see theory and reality line up a little better than they have to date. 2) Effective buffering, with retries, in wireless devices is far, far, far, in excess of that, at least at present, for many devices. For reference, going to say, 10,000 buffers, would be good. I look forward to seeing chaotic effects. C) The TCP algorithm in use is not documented D) The distance of the paths is short. Simulating a longer distance path (say, 100ms) would be interesting. -- Dave Täht --------------020602000405070306010504 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=utf-8; name="dave_taht.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="dave_taht.vcf" begin:vcard fn;quoted-printable:Dave T=C3=A4ht n;quoted-printable:T=C3=A4ht;Dave email;internet:dave.taht@gmail.com tel;home:1-239-829-5608 tel;cell:0638645374 x-mozilla-html:FALSE version:2.1 end:vcard --------------020602000405070306010504--